Revamping Meaning and Theory

Go to page

Active Member

So I kind of have come and started taking a different stance lately in terms of academia and the like, and the one thing I kind of noticed lately that I should have come and put out was this:

Do we have to redefine the science constructs for the measure and theory of "time" first; before we can be able to on from there with methodology of actually going back in a rewind or hop back state, rather than being completely confined into one corner of academia where we can only see one rather than a multiplanar view of forces and the like?

Do you all think we all need to keep it simple with all that before we can go on working from there with all that? I think it helps make things much cleaner and easier going on from there.

What would be some good tests and measurements/experiments and theories to work with before we can get to "that point?" Do you all feel we kind of need to backtrack from Einstein and Heisenburg to Newton and Weber/Fechner to help us get to those concepts and ideas to help redefine those ideas and tread and pave way towards a new trail and direction we all haven't come across before?

What cool ideas can you all come up with that can come help with that?

Temporal Engineer

I've said it before, "take one step forwards and two steps backwards". That is the true path to knowledge. I've noticed that theories are holding us back. And the theories all have gaping holes in them. Erase all physics back to just before Newton. Then you will find the education that Tesla himself received. What was science like before theories? They used empirical facts derived through observation. The industrial revolution that Tesla brought forth was based on real scientific facts of the day. Nobody ever built anything from theories.

I've pointed out before that Mass is also a theory. It doesn't exist in our universe. The use of equations to describe our reality is also a theory. Once all the make believe is removed from the knowledge base, then we will be left with a body of facts that will be the true understanding.

As for an understanding of time? I think this is being deliberately hidden from us. But facts about time are right out in the open for all to see. Train yourself to observe the facts. With many of my experiments the flow of time appears to be independent from the overall flow of time. Conclusion: Time has more than one direction.

Active Member

I've said it before, "take one step forwards and two steps backwards". That is the true path to knowledge. I've noticed that theories are holding us back. And the theories all have gaping holes in them. Erase all physics back to just before Newton. Then you will find the education that Tesla himself received. What was science like before theories? They used empirical facts derived through observation. The industrial revolution that Tesla brought forth was based on real scientific facts of the day. Nobody ever built anything from theories.

I've pointed out before that Mass is also a theory. It doesn't exist in our universe. The use of equations to describe our reality is also a theory. Once all the make believe is removed from the knowledge base, then we will be left with a body of facts that will be the true understanding.

Bro; everything you said right there, I completely got. They're all scientific constructs that try to assume and explain reality. Our language alone is "theory" also. "Theory" is the same like a living contradiction that tries to pull a circle within and outside of itself. At the same time; I can't stand how people keep bastardizing that word to assume they can use it to keep explaining stuff with no empirical evidence, when the reality is that they're hypothetical at best. I mean, come on, I get how people want to keep pushing to have their work and research get bumped up from hypothesis to theory and then law, but geez man, too many academics keep cheating in this day and age. Something tells me people keep toying with their scales and skewing their data in a way where it's working in their favor, but not in the natural way it was meant to be observed and manipulated.

Do you mind me asking if you by any chance have noticed any constant and consistent patterns in terms of those science constants on the metaphysical ontological line? Or are all those measurements and scales just trash as well with poor reliability and validity?

As for an understanding of time? I think this is being deliberately hidden from us. But facts about time are right out in the open for all to see. Train yourself to observe the facts. With many of my experiments the flow of time appears to be independent from the overall flow of time. Conclusion: Time has more than one direction.

Hahaha I like the contradiction with that double entendre there. I can definitely get what you mean by that. Bruce Lee also had the same concept and idea he said in an interview I saw of him a while back.

I got a super good question; what's the independent variable then? You make if sound like forces go in multiplanar directions instead of a unilateral one. That's my strength and conditioning class there.

What about going in the opposite direction of the earth's rotation around the sun? Or rather; the opposite direction of the model for linear time since it's obviously not linear but more "quanta" I suppose.

I got a super good question; what's the independent variable then? You make if sound like forces go in multiplanar directions instead of a unilateral one. That's my strength and conditioning class there.

What about going in the opposite direction of the earth's rotation around the sun? Or rather; the opposite direction of the model for linear time since it's obviously not linear but more "quanta" I suppose.

I got a super good question; what's the independent variable then? You make if sound like forces go in multiplanar directions instead of a unilateral one. That's my strength and conditioning class there.

What about going in the opposite direction of the earth's rotation around the sun? Or rather; the opposite direction of the model for linear time since it's obviously not linear but more "quanta" I suppose.

Just that? Wow; so force and movement is all there is needed to get that desired function and effect then if the case then; right? Is our measurement, category and number theory even good enough to make sense of these hypothetical claims and correctly applying them?

Alongside with the idea of going in the correct direction against the circular curvilinear kinematic force against the rotation of both the earth, moon, sun and the stars, right? Kind of like a small little gap wormhole you can kind of fall right into and exploit? A vaccuming void of negative energy and flow opposite of giving energy/light?

Do you think that's like a good first step and guess to coming about and building a correct model to correctly apply a working and functioning scale and model that works by subtracting that which doesn't? That's completely simply all we need at this point for this hypothesis, right? Start off small and blank with the "laws" and forget the theories? That makes sense. Question is how to find a propelling medium.

Yeah this is basic physics, philosophy, math, psychology and kinesiology all applied onto one right there.

Velocity sounds like if movement was implied: but I simply meant direction as is; stationary; not implied movement.

Also I never considered nuclear forces as stationary potential energy; but I still consider gravity as a constant rotational force with motion. That's something to note and keep into consideration for creative catalystic tools to help perpetuate and activate a means like a magnet bullet train to go propel itself into a different dimension of swift speeds because of its overall combined rotational force of gravity being propelled at beyond fast light speeds curvilinearly opposes to the normal directional flow of time relative to the earth and sun martial spatial and geometric directional displacement.

What interesting is how that's similar to how we map motion on humans with 3 tools: isotonics wirh eccentric and concentric phases, isometrics and isokinestics of the biomechanical motion system; each one respectively talks about movement with tools that generates free range of motion, static stability and balance static motion where no movement is being made and where you move at the same speeds with various strengths of forces no matter what. We talk about those physics concepts.

It has been an observation of mine that forces usually work in groups of three.

Rather then classify forces using motion, learn to observe how each one affects time.

No one has mapped the time directions. Yet we know we can create simultaneity. So that right there looks like a time direction that runs at right angles to the normal direction of time.

But how about something that goes the opposite like a rewind or going back as if your going forward relative to yourself?

I think the mapping of the human directional atlas is good enough. The question is: what do we use as a baseline and constant anchor to use as a standard and fallback to help calibrate a perfect scale to test measure and quantify a way to create a learning curve tool to actually get to that point over tie and actually refine and efficiently finish itself to get the job done as to what it's supposed to go do after being tested for reliability and validity? You know? We need a 0 point to calibrate the scale and go on from there; if we don't have a baseline; we'll all get lost.

Temporal Engineer

Gravitational force does not require rotation. If rotation is applied to a gravitational body, centrifugal force develops. The rotational force is always positive. I consider that force to be the inertial force. Notice the three forces present.

The gravitational force amplitude appears to be tied to the radius of the earth.